On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 16:27 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Excuse me, you're making the assumption that loud-mouths like me aren't > >willing to pay for Solaris - I am willing to pay for Solaris, but I'm > >not willing to pay for a Solaris whose hardware support is subpar. The > >day when Solaris gets up to the bar set my me will be the day I'll > >purchase Solaris and support. > > That's not what I'm saying; I'm saying that when you bring in money, > opensolaris.org is not the appropriate venue.
But ultimately what is developed in OpenSolaris will end up in a payable product. > >Thats the standard set by me - and people like me are pissed off because > >we really *DO* want to pay for Solaris and we really do want to support > >Sun, and it frustrates us that it is the lack of movement in certain > >areas which inhibits us. > > Ok, so what areas specifically are inhibiting you? And do you want that > support in "Solaris" or is "Solaris Nevada"/"OpenSolaris" support > sufficient? If Sun supported my webcam (bug reported), along with my wireless out of the box on the current release of Solaris - I would purchase it straight away. The webcam is uvc compliant but needs a firmware uploaded (the whole information is linked on bugster) and my wireless is supported in SXCE but not in Solaris 10 x86/64. Matthew _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
